Tuesday, January 20, 2009

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.

This essay is compiled from comments Fjordman made on an earlier post.

Note: Since this post was published, Fjordman has added some more material, which may be found at the bottom of this essay.

I’ve asked this question before: Suppose the natives in some Western European countries actually start to seriously resisting the organized destruction of their countries, halt mass immigration and reverse Multiculturalism. How will American authorities and media react to this?

Frankly, I wouldn’t be too surprised if they turn out to be actively hostile to native Europeans. That was the case with Clinton and with Bush, who after all supported the continued Islamization of Europe through Turkish membership of the European Union. It will be even worse with Obama, an anti-white Marxist.

As we know, a “Nazi” these days is not one of the many Muslims and their Leftist cheerleaders who shout “Death to Jews! in the streets of Europe; it’s any white person who doesn’t lie down and die on command. If we don’t lie down and die, we must be Nazis. We are after all Europeans.

We should reach out to American individuals. They are victims of the same Multiculturalist war against European civilization as we are. But we should expect no sympathy from the American media and political elites. They are a hostile entity just as much as the EU elites are.- - - - - - - - -Europeans have learned the wrong lessons from Nazism, not the right ones. For instance, the European Union is now actively and deliberately promoting Islamic immigration to Europe by the tens of millions, knowing fully well that they will gradually displace the original inhabitants of the continent. Indeed, they desire this.

They also know that the people who move in have a culture of extreme anti-Semitism and despise Christianity, just as the Nazis did. Eurabianism has disturbing similarities with Nazism in some ways and with Communism in others.

The EU is promoting Lebensraum for a new master race in Europe just like the Nazis did. They just disagree on which master race to promote. The resurgence of violent anti-Semitism in Europe is directly caused by the policies of the European Union and the national political elites in Belgium and elsewhere. To hear them denounce others as “Fascists” or “anti-Semites” is the ultimate fraud.

We do have a powerful Fascist organization in Europe today: it’s called the European Union.

Update: Additional notes from Fjordman:

With the possible exception of Sweden, France, and Belgium (which is dominated by a French-speaking political elite), the English-speaking world is leading the disintegration of the West, ideologically and demographically. All of the West is sick, but the Anglosphere is sicker than most. The English-speaking countries still have the most dynamic military traditions of the West, but that counts for little as long as they are used for promoting global Multiculturalism rather than protecting the home country.

I cannot see that the Anglosphere has more freedom of speech, either. The USA does, at least for a while longer (we’ll see what the Black Messiah does about that), but Al-Canada is plain nuts and Britain is a Multicultural banana republic. Australia and New Zealand could be a part of Greater China by mid-century. Maybe they will be more prosperous as a part of Greater China than France will be as a part of Greater Algeria or the United States as a part of Greater Mexico. But they will be Asians, not Westerners.

As I’ve documented in my book Defeating Eurabia, this is a planned destruction of all European and indeed Western nation states through Multiculturalism and transnational organizations such as the EU. There is nothing accidental about this. We need to support, as a matter of principle, all European patriots who fight for their country and their dignity, provided that they do not champion totalitarian ideologies. We’re all in the same boat.

I will support the Vlaams Belang first of all because they deserve it, and second of all because other Westerners should show solidarity with those who fight for their sovereignty. The VB are attacked because the Eurabian elites fear that they constitute a threat to their power both nationally and transnationally, and they’re right. Which is exactly why native Europeans should support them. Splitting Belgium, the institutional and geographical heart of the European Union, will create cracks in the EU itself.

The EU is currently the planet’s most evil organization, an institutionalized attack on the very existence of the native peoples of an entire continent, the most influential and creative civilization in human history. The EU is an organized crime against humanity, and we should support absolutely everything that can undermine the EU as well as Globalism and Multiculturalism throughout the Western world.

That’s why I hate Belgium, which has one of the sickest and most evil political elites in the Western world, and love the Vlaams Belang.

39
comments:

A few days ago I wrote this: "The EU, along with it's "One-Worlders", global warming fanatics, and other revolutionists, regard our sovereign and independent nations--along with their peoples--as historical anachronisms that have been rendered unfit to exist by the the historical evolutionary paradigm.

We've had this before. In Ukraine, in occupied Poland, and others."

Seems much like Fjordman's latest diatribe. It would be better with links.

Thank you for posting. You could perhaps include my next comment on the previous thread as well as this one:

As I've documented in my book Defeating Eurabia, this is a planned destruction of all European and indeed Western nation states through Multiculturalism and transnational organizations such as the EU. There is nothing accidental about this. We need to support, as a matter of principle, all European patriots who fight for their country and their dignity, provided that they do not champion totalitarian ideologies. We're all in the same boat.

I will support the Vlaams Belang first of all because they deserve it, and second of all because other Westerners should show solidarity with those who fight for their sovereignty. The VB are attacked because the Eurabian elites fear that they constitute a threat to their power both nationally and transnationally, and they're right. Which is exactly why native Europeans should support them. Splitting Belgium, the institutional and geographical heart of the European Union, will create cracks in the EU itself.

The EU is currently the planet's most evil organization, an institutionalized attack on the very existence of the native peoples of an entire continent, the most influential and creative civilization in human history. The EU is an organized crime against humanity, and absolutely everything that can undermine the EU as well as Globalism and Multiculturalism throughout the Western world should be supported.

That's why I hate Belgium, which has one of the sickest and most evil political elites in the Western world, and love the Vlaams Belang.

This is a very important topic. Sadly, there is no political soultion. I wonder how far away Euro countries are from devolving into Native vs Immigrant warfare. Also, which country will be the first? UK? Are there anti-Multiculti groups out there preparing for this?

What I do not understand is why VB does not travel around Europe. It could be relatively easy to elevate them to a higher concern - they have more insight in the EU and French policy for ex. Right now there is a new right party in making in the Czech rep. SSO "Free citizens party" strictly against EU/Lisbon - more than Irish Libertas. 100% anti MultiCulti/islam etc. The founders are civilized, one is Jewish - you might google some of his literary work in English - Benjamin Kuras.

VB should also highlight Flemish culture, history, academics with lots of names. It may capture attention of people not digging too deep in politics and enlarge the platform.

Flemings can do their job indirectly first and achieve later even more than independance in "Endeffekt".

But for that they need partners and sympathy all over Europe.

Germans get slowly fed up with the French and EU policy and start noticing/appreciating our nice antiEU attitudes, new patterns of thinking might emerge, more focus on politics size of Bundesland - securing the ground and citizen first.

"I wouldn’t be too surprised if they turn out to be actively hostile to native Europeans. That was the case with Clinton and with Bush, who after all supported the continued Islamization of Europe through Turkish membership of the European Union. It will be even worse with Obama, an anti-white Marxist.

Posted by Fjordman

Even though I'm not thrilled with this presidency either, I can't help but think that Fjordman, along with GoV and much of its readership, is reading a great deal more into the current situation than the evidence supports.

Obama a Marxist? Maybe of the watered down, soft core sort of "Marxism" that's been in retreat from the ham fisted approach to social change advocated in early Marxist writings like "The Communist Manifesto" since at least the 1930s if not earlier. But the insipid ideological tripe that that part of the Left has rendered itself into today hardly seems strong enough on its own to pose an existential threat to the American way of life, and I know of no evidence that links Obama even to any of that. There is, in any case, less of this in the U.S. than anywhere else in the Western world. No other developed country identifies itself with the free market philosophy as exclusively as the U.S., where, unlike Canada or Europe, practically no one even dares to call thesmselves a "Socialist" publicly.

And "anti-white"? What evidence is there for that? His mother - with whom he had more familial contact than with his African father - and of course, his grandmother, were both white!

Perhaps I haven't been paying enough attention. Have I missed something along the way? Your dismal assessment puts the Bill Ayers connection under tremendous strain, to say the least. What else do you have?

Like most GoV readers, I would much rather that it had been McCain, but to assume that the U.S. is now politically toxic to Europeans is a tremendous stretch. It's worth considering the following words from Obama's inauguration speech earlier today, which clearly address the Ummah:

"To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history...".

This would have been better if he hadn't muddied the waters with a lot of talk about "reassuring the Muslim world", which, in fact, ought to itself be bending over backwards to reassure the rest of the world, but at the very it least argues for a "wait and see" response. Here you have a definite challenge to Islam.

Finally, I have to observe that Europe is much further down the road of Islamicization than the U.S. is, and this has been true since long before the EU, the breakup of Yugoslavia or Kosovo, so who would be more likely to corrupt who?

"Weather-member Laura Whitehorn got 20 years for being part of a conspiracy in the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Capitol. [12] In his book, Fugitive Days, Ayers admitted being part of a Weatherman conspiracy that bombed the Capitol and the Pentagon in the 1970s. The book came out in 2001, during a Republican administration. "

"Obama told ABC News’ Charlie Gibson:

“I’ll repeat again what I’ve said many times. This is a guy who engaged in some despicable acts 40 years ago when I was eight years old. By the time I met him, 10 or 15 years ago, he was a college professor of education at the University of Illinois.”

Obama is objectively lying because he was both more than old enough to know what the Weather Underground was, and by concealing what they did he acknowledges there malignancy. It's a bit like George Bush laughing at the people who received the death penalty when he was the governor of Texas and we al know how lovely old Dubya was.

And how does the cancer media explain this?

"Associated Press dispatch that described Bill Ayers as:

“A co-founder of the Weather Underground, which claimed responsibility for nonfatal bombings in the United States during the Vietnam War-era.” [5] So, a new concept: idealism plus “non-fatal” bombings. "

So. The ends justify the means, idealistic causes and political violence, sounds like the Iraq war to me.

Someone like this who can tell stupid lies, evil lies, will make a good U.S. president.

I'm a bit more optimist about the behavoiur of the USoA with the EU in the case of a civil war (or like) with the muslims.

I would say that the investments of the US in Europe and the investment of the Europe in the US will be threatened. So I think the US will support the legitimate governments and will help them looking the other way (and probably actively helping them under the table).

Too much money and wealth would change hands if any single government of the EU was changed in favor of an islamic one.

For all their leftism, the Kennedy were the ones supporting of the Department of State in the Cilean Golpe. Multiply this tens times and you have the size of the problem.

Many people would change their political view in this case, out of love for their wallet.

Rier: We'll have to wait and see what Obama does, but I don't trust him, no. English once spread out of England and conquered the world. Now the rest of the world is conquering the English-speaking countries. If current trends continue, people in Singapore will speak English while the nation that created the English language will cease to exist.

The English-speaking world, and the United States in particular, is responsible for championing the most dangerous idea of our time: That of the proposition nation. The United States is now supposed to be a "universal nation," but there is no such thing. Everybody from Saudi Arabia and Somalia to Korea can supposedly be imported and included in the USA, and the American political system is equally universal and should be exported to other cultures, by force if necessary. Under Obama, I fear that the USA will no longer be the land of the free, home of the brave, but rather a global enforcer of non-discrimination and Multiculturalism, the Multicultural Empire.

The European Union is a different kind of Multicultural Empire, although it, too, champions a form of proposition nation. I suspect that the idea dates back to the Enlightenment, as Conservative Swede has suggested before. The French, who to a great extent have created the ideological and bureaucratic basis of the EU, have their own ideas about assimilating people from all around the world. Those of us who live in Western Europe thus have the misfortune of being exposed to the influence of no less than two Multicultural Empires at the same time.

So the English-speaking world is suicidal and crazy, and the French and suicidal and crazy, too. Maybe we need the Germans back....

Personally I give the Europeans a better chance of survival than the US because they at least have their pre-immigration history and culture to fall back on as grounds for protecting and reinvigorating their countries. We in the US, already now 1/3 minority, don't have that luxury. If we attempted to point out that the nation was founded by Europeans and populated largely by Europeans up until the late 60's we would invite calls of racism which would send most Americans scurrying for cover. Already every single day the race industry is dragging some company, person, or organization into court. Now that Barack Obama is president and we have such a large number of popular and successful black entertainers, black will be the new white. Lots of people are going to wish they were black because it's "cool". I expect an increase in anti-white sentiment amongst our growing minority populations. "This ain't your country anymore whitey"

Fjordman - I think the only reason the U.S. continues to push for Turkey to be incorporated into the EU is so that we can maintain our military bases in the country. Turkey wants desperately to integrate with the E.U. in order to let out a lot of their population and also to allow favorable trading relations. The U.S. doesn't really give a damn about either of these factors... They just want their military bases and are willing to sell the E.U. Turkey to get them...

I don't doubt your analysis of the condition of Western culture in Europe or North America, or the role of what remains of classic Marxism and much of the rest of the Left in bringing about that sad state of affairs through its alliance with the ethos of multiculturalism and immigration.

I'm just uncertain to what extent we can conclude that Obama himself is tied to any of this. He obviously is left of center but the evidence linking him to radicalism, terrorism and the like is, as far as I know, definitely worrisome, but also sparse and inconclusive. (Or again, have I overlooked something?)

There are some grounds for arguing that he is not typical of today's Left. It has been noted, for example, that he stayed clear of race politics and that he does not have any personal baggage from the civil rights movement. Given this, I wonder if he might, under the right circumstances, be able to define some new form of moderate, center-Left policy that breaks free of the ideological influences that have made the present day Left so corrosive, and might actually be able to contribute something of value to the development and preservation of the West rather than its demise. This would be the best case scenario, but of course it's uncertain at best. I think you put it best when you said that we'll have to see what he does.

The point I really want to make in this thread is that, at this point, it's probably best for Western nativists to retain enough of an opening to him to have a bridge by which to bring him over, if not to their program, at least to those elements of it that are compatible with ideas he would regard as "progressive" enough to be in his comfort zone. For example, if a dialogue developed between, on the one hand, social movements connected to Obama's administration and, on the other, Conservative forces attempting to mount anti-Jihadist resistance, that prompted a leader like Obama or those movements themselves to call upon the Left to define limits to multicultural pluralism that would oblige immigrants or members of settled Muslim minorities to accept, for example, the legal equality of women on pain of imprisonment, deportation or expulsion, this would be a great step forward.

Given the current, largely undefined nature of Obama's political alignment, it seems to me premature to close the door on all interaction or engagement with him. If he and the Right can meet on the kind of common ground I'm suggesting here, it may be that he could turn out to be an unexpected ally, and a very powerful one at that, and it would be a tragedy if an opportunity like that (not least for the Right to get some satisfaction for its grievances with the Left) to be lost prematurely.

I don't say that we should trust him or give ourselves over to him blindly like so many seem willing uncritically to do. I'm only saying "Keep an open mind" until we've had a chance to see more of what he'll do.

Oh Rier,You really believe Obama to be so premature in his political ideology so as to be able to be pursuaded by the likes of Fjordman, you, or any sane Westerner? One only has to look at the players in Obama's life and career to know that he's been holding his cards close to his chest, only to be discovered by those who done enough digging. This man is every bit a leftist megalomaniac as they come. Any dialogue he will have with anything resembling right-wing politicos is leftists who use the "conservative" nomenclature and care only about being "in the clique", as it were.

Obama is a dangerous man, and it won't be long until we all see to what extent he will destroy Western civilization.

Read Obama's books. He HATES White men. Also older White women who remind him of his abandoning mother. He does not mind pretty young White women.

In "Dreams From My Father: A Story of RACE and INHERITANCE" Obama reveals himself obsessed with Race, and hatred of Whites: he writes his loathing of a White interviewer for a Job merely because of his race, dumps a White girl he is in love with (his own words) because he does not want to be related to any more Whites (her parents he admits were unobjectionable) and writes how he wanted to echo Malcolm X in doing some "symbolic" act of violence (i.e. murder of some White person) to "purge" his White Blood from his person. Given that his mother at age 17 voluntarily got pregnant with him and married his Father, that's a remarkable statement.

Further evidence of Obama's loathing and hatred of Whites: his choice of Wife (Michelle's senior thesis contains explicit rejection of Whites and White "culture" and Black Nationalist Separatism) and Pastor -- Jeremiah Wright HATES White (Men). Wright is of course being sued (again) by a White man whose Wife was seduced by Wright during marital counseling.

Obama has two years representing White voters, that's it. His entire political career has been catering to anti-White hatred in South Side Chicago, and before that an Affirmative Action guy who did nothing useful or accomplished anything, merely took money off the public dole. He has according to those who claim to have seen the LAT secret tape (they will not release it, which shows you how bad it is) at the party for PLO terrorist Rashid Khalidi, engaged in gratuitous anti-Semitic and anti-White slurs (Michelle reportedly engaged in worse) and laughed at all sorts of horrible things said about Jews and Whites.

After all, in LA a local Civil Rights leader (Black) during an award to a Jewish woman whose organization assisted Black youth made explicit anti-Semitic remarks directly to her. This was at a public awards ceremony. That attitude is pretty typical of most Blacks. Whites and Jews in particular are the "enemy" who are convenient scapegoats.

"This man is every bit a leftist megalomaniac as they come. ... Obama is a dangerous man, and it won't be long until we all see to what extent he will destroy Western civilization."

You may be entirely correct about all of this. But given the ENORMOUS popular support he seems to enjoy at this apparently liminal moment in history (and no one can say for sure how long this will last), I think that it may be a tactical error, possibly a serious one, for the Nativist sector represented by sites like GoV to act, at this time, ONLY as the jeering section, instead of being seen to try to engage in constructive engagement with is opponents. At this point, I don't see what is to be lost by assuming their good faith and the normal types of political interaction that follow from that.

"We should reach out to American individuals. They are victims of the same Multiculturalist war against European civilization as we are. But we should expect no sympathy from the American media and political elites. They are a hostile entity just as much as the EU elites are."

It would be good if it was this way.The truth however is that "the (leftist) elites" in Europe have the active support of a sizable population, perhaps even the majority.

In the United States of America it is not that bad once the country is "Conservative" the American way and once the white people there did not elect president Hussein. However, many "whites" did vote for him and many other American citizens of less European origins elected him. America will perish due to demographical erosion.

We, Europeans, on the other hand, are already promoting our own demise. And yes, we support our governments and we indirectly support the European Union.

My point is that that vision of "the people" vs "the elite" is not clear cut. Many "people" are for the elite, if not the majority.

And throwing around purely ideological pseudo-insults like "fascist", "racist", "bad", "good", "Nazi", (and no, I like to throw around Communist and Marxist...) etc. does not help at all.

-----------------------------------

But what can we do? What is acceptable?We are literally asked to fight a lion with a nail clipper!

What many do not understand is that it does not matter so much what Obama thinks right now, it matters what constellation gives him more power - which might be the marxist or MC thing. He can go the other way as well - being trained to be a islamochristian afrowhite chameleon.

As a top politician you do not have many choices.

He must know that all the time more his blackness was given a special treatment by the whites than anything else and gave him access to power rather than some outspoken qualities. This is humiliating and obliging.

Imagine him white - nothing special - just a rather unexperienced younger man with no special achievements to capture our attention - no response from non-whites either. Zero.

"Also, which country will be the first? UK? Are there anti-Multiculti groups out there preparing for this?"

I don't know why but I have a great faith in the U.K.. I believe that something good is to come to the West (of Europe), it will come from the U.K.. And for good I mean a victory of the Britts in a kind of Civil War, or simply the climbing of BNP towards the power, or a maduring of the BNP and "new boys" to real fashion Traditionalism. But it will take a while (at least two, three years)...

Concerning the groups, they exist but are too underground and too extremist to be of any good to anything but wide open war. Study Serbia.

---------------------------------

Rier, why don't you read one of Obama's books? You would be amazed...

"to assume that the U.S. is now politically toxic to Europeans is a tremendous stretch."

I would like to say so. Why do you Americans have such a weak capacity to undergo criticism of your own country?Only in America people believe their country is somewhat magically good just because, damn!

I bet we have very differing notions of what "the West" is but I am almost surely that for Obama "the West" means Democracy and Diversity...

... those words adress more to the core of the West, that is profound European Traditions and its ethos, its voice, its soul than to the Ummah... but then again...

"who would be more likely to corrupt who?"

You are foolishly assuming that the main problems of "the West" are, say, islam and muslims... ... which is laughable! It is laughable because those *are* external problems to the West.Who started Multiculturalism? Who imposed it on Europe?Who fought colonisation despite being one of the masterpieces of it?Who has been attacking virtually all non E.U. ethnic European States who focus strongly their European National chracter (Serbia and Russia)?

the only mistake of Europeans an Americans is not to recognize islam as more totalitarian and colonizing than anything produed in the West.

Islam is the only colonialistic doctrine written in detail you can find in the world.

There was never a written document in the West giving us any guidelines or claims how to treat other nations, it was given naturally by horrible lack of development, organization and education mainly due to islam which decided this power equation.

Without islam we might compete right now with high tech India, Ethiopia-Sudan, China, Egypt and Persia.

See the islam belt hindering these natural developments for more than thousand years. Remember also that the Mediterranian was the Europe and would be now as well reaching out to India, Persia, inner Africa with now delay!

Without islam we would be right now very fluent in Greek to maintain relationships with ME and Egypt!!! Never forget that!

We would spend lot of time reading lost books from Alexandria and Constantinople and Persepolis/ChristianAramaicBaghdad/Basra/Damascus.

If an immigrant-native civil war were to break out in Europe, I don't see how there can be any doubt as to which side the USA would support. It has nothing to do with Obama, but our ideals, our education, and our press would compel us to throw in with the immigrants. No question.

Seriously, supporting the legitimate democratic governments of Europe against neo-Nazi terrorists? It's a no-brainer. Now, I don't see things that way, but it's perfectly obvious that that's what we'd be sold, and the vast majority would buy. At the very least, the US would sent huge amounts of money, weapons, and food to the immigrant side.

I agree with you because you agree with me! Everything surrounding islam is foreign and external to European Civilisation.It was only an internal matter in XV-XVI century Spain and Portugal but we surpassed it with the edicts of expulsion, the purity of blood laws and the Holly Inquisition... The Russians also had the Tartarians to deal with and they mannaged (I don't know how) to deal with them. Now the South Eastern Europeans could not lead with it... but I know they will. It takes time.

"Islam is the only colonialistic doctrine written in detail you can find in the world."

You say this because you are naive and live in a land locked Mittel Europa country surrounded by powerfull neighbours like Germany and Austria... and why not, Poland as well... You would be surprised to the things that go on in the West. English colonising the British Isles and Castillans Spain, not to mention the Americas and Oceania... we here in the border of the Atlantic also wrote some pretty nice colonialis pieces and with the help of the Catholic Church then... The "legenda negra" is really dark and false but it contains a little truth.Anyway - there I go, divagating - I understand what you meant and I pretty much agree with you.

Compete with Ethiopia Sudan? That is a little too much, no?

I think I know more than you how islam kills "progress" (the good kind). However islam in itself was somewhat advanced and it kept that way for many centuries... look to the Turks penetrating in Europe, for instance. I cannot see Islam as foreign to Egypt or North Africa nowadays, however.

I think that when the Roman Empire felt, the whole Mediterranean had to colapse. In the end, the Romans were the only Civilised people there (take this Greeks and Egyptians!) sustaining the whole infrastructure.

Sometimes, I read XIX century Orientalist novels and I tell you I would love to know the Middle East. But Islam has erased what was there to be seen. That is sad but, as I see it, again, it was just a logic consequence of the fall of Latinity, The Roman Empire (both the Latin and the Greek one).

Czechmade, have you ever been to a muslim country? I find Morocco way too atractive and maybe is a kind of romanticism on my part but, I really cannot immagine that land without islam. Morocco is barbarian, but it is also human... That's the strange and attractive thing about islam (I've never been to a muslim country but, for instance, my Grandparent was an immigrant in Lybia and Italy and France and Tunisia and...).

Fjordman says, "For instance, the European Union is now actively and deliberately promoting Islamic immigration to Europe by the tens of millions, knowing fully well that they will gradually displace the original inhabitants of the continent. Indeed, they desire this."

But why should they desire this? What's in it for them? They also are the "original inhabitants".

Islam results in a reduced quality of life - even for the elites. Are those at the top not concerned at Islam's (ie Islamic peoples') incompetence with regard both to infrastructure and technology. Are Europe's elites really looking forward to life in a tent eating half-cooked mutton with their fingers?

Germans. Pfff... I trust more your proposed coalition of Czechs-Poles-Western Ukrainians... and who knows? Hungarians, Slovaks and other Eastern types! :)

This despite the fact that I don't see Eastern Europe with power to influence the West per se (of course, except those we shall not speak of). I maintain that once Scandinavia is, well... what it is; Portugal is too small and deranged and then the Spaniards cannot even deal with the Basques, what about Basques+Portuguese+Catalans, what about adding Third Worlders, well... forget us Hispanics at all...

As I was saying, I still believe that we are dependent on the big Nations.France is France and unless they revive the year of 1789 but this time somehow in the oposite direction (oh nevermind, 1968 would be just fine...) they will continue to be useless.

Germany and Germans. Was it not you that wanted to be German? You see, the Germans will soon became the most happy about the European Union because the European Union will now slowly cease to be centred on France (remember that France already needs Germany's complacency to do something in the E.U.) and deslocate it's centre to Germany.Germany thinks: "If only Hitler had never existed and we could argue with other European Nations in the same tone they argue with us...".

Note this my Czech friend:Who does France influences?What has traditionally almost been it's backyard: Portugal and Spain, currently borrow from France only the most lefist ideas. Otherwise, all fashionable comes from the Americas and the U.K.; Italy is a power on its own... as well as Germany. Ireland and Scotland are not French oriented as it were (Scotland at least) during the Middle Ages...France can even barely influenced its tiny little creation: Belgium. France is in decadence only paraleled by America... (Sarkozy's is French main patriot/Conservative this days!).

But Germany. Look to it's influence:

We have of course, Austria;Then we have all of Scandinavia: Norway, Sweden and Denmark;Then we also do have Switzerland;Then we have the Poles and the Czechs...Of course the Benelux: The Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg;And trough Austria, we may even reach Hungary;And not forget the anti-Russian Baltic, from Lithuania all the way to Finland!

Come on. Let's ananlyse the dismembered of Yugoslavia and look to your Mittel Europa, Southernmost German dependency and the role Germany had in the creation of that most beautifull Nation:Croatia!

The European Union will soon satisfy (forever) the apetite of those two big powers: France and Germany.Nowadays France is the emperor of the E.U., tomorrow it will be double headed like the Byzantine Eagle and the Germans will have the upper hand over the French.

The current power of the French depends on 1) Their demographical weight and 2) It's Nuclear capabilities. I see France as way more dangerous than Iran.

So, we have only more two states in which we can count on, and none of them is European:The Mediterranean Italy andthe Atlantic United Kingdom/England.And of course, from the Eastern Steppes we will always have Russia.

It's these three states who can do something about the future of European Civilisation and, I will only count in America if they surprise me in the next five years. (Australia and Argentina are too distant and Brazil is too multicultural)

remember that Etiopia was a natural neighbour of Byzantine Empire, our Roman Catholic world was slightly marginal at that time and reunification was a topic dealt with many time.

We should forget the degree of insignificance of Byz. Empire in later times and view it from their point of view at that time.

The Turks did not change the functioning Byzantine administration too much. Their label was of course "new". Let us see the paradoxes.

We should have some bibliography on this topic and spend few weeks studying the subject.

As for Morocco - there is a Berber renaissance in process stretching even to Holland (de Hague - Le Papillon). We should train our eyes to see clearly the Arab/Berber "clash of civilizations". hahhahaha. Precious.

The Byzantines never linked their clergy/monkhood/monasteries with military projects and complained about Catholics for doing so. Again remember - at that time we were marginal "Christians", i.e. not representative for "Christian world" and they were not.

Imagine for a while South America Byzantine. (The Greeks were sailors or not?). It was islam that sent our ships to SA indirectly.

Oh please Czechmade! Of course Morocco and Algeria are Arab-Berber. But honestly, I don't see it as a clash of Civilisations. Berbers are also muslim. Berbers are just like Rednecks living in more isolated areas and complaining about everything.

Concerning Ethiopia, sorry but I do not see their potential... but again, I am the one who cannot see Mayan/Incan potential as well (Natives of Mexico-Guatemala and Peru-Bolivia).

I have a very strong view on Civilisations.First, it is European Civilisation, the First World.The Second World is the High Culture producing in North East Asia (Mongolia, China, Koreas and Japan).And we have the 2,5 World: India.

All the rest is Third World with Islamic Civilisation and South East Asian (Thai, Vietnamese, Khmer and Bumrmanese, etc.) Civilisation being the ones who shed some light...

P.S. - While the Turks did not changed the Byzantine machine properly (with the Mohamed II, I believe, proclaiming itself Byzantine/Roman Emperor) they were able to transform the more advanced and Civilised European Stated to a bacon of... to a hell hole. Since 1453 that Constantinople does not give nothing to the world, except war and siflis.

Your post is right on the money, Fjordman. As we enter these new dark ages, it's going to be up to individuals banding together with common purpose to save Western Civilization. The media, the elites and the goverments on both sides of the pond are now it's enemies along with the Islamofacists

It is quite difficult to repair your misreadings - I have never set up a block of countries to do something, I find it silly. You paint some pictures of kingdoms wrapped in silk and three of them win the contest of beauty. History becomes mythology, it flows like music in a dinner hall.

Right now Berbers find out they have been f... sorry misled by Arabs for centuries. This is a good news worth following.

Your and ConSwedes concept of grand static nations has been outdone the day the big high tech Merkava tank passed the Lebanese border to chase a few Hisbollah devils and was blown up.

We have to rethink and be smart able to combine our forces on local level ad hoc. It is a pleasant good news. Our life can be much more interesting. We abandone our blind elites and form something which would be stupid to describe in advance. Resist such temptations.

"Your and ConSwedes concept of grand static nations has been outdone the day the big high tech Merkava tank passed the Lebanese border to chase a few Hisbollah devils and was blown up."

Huh? I really cannot understand this...

"I have never set up a block of countries to do something, I find it silly."

No you haven't. But I recall you said that the European Civilisation and Continent could be saved by those Eastern European States who have not put themselves on their knees in relation to the European Union and Third World immigration, like your own Czech Republic under Vclav Klaus... And that is why I mentioned it, only that.

"Right now Berbers find out they have been f... sorry misled by Arabs for centuries."

You do not get it. In Morocco and other North African States there is almost no distinction between Arabs and Berbers. The main distinction is that the Berbers are poor, economically and culturally, and live in isolated places while the Arabs are cosmopolitan, rich and versed in islamic culture. There is a true mixture of Arab-Berbers like in the White Catholics of the United States you can find a mixture of Italian-Irish people.I will advise you to not trust the Berbers. Find out what are the Berber's claims before romanticising that they are the Christian-European victims of Roman North Africa prior to Islam had arrived... (how many of the troublesome Moroccans in the Netherlands and Algerians in France are Berbers?).

Ordinary Europeans haven't taken the most rudimentary risk-free steps to defend their cultures i.e. they have not voted for anti-immigrant parties by secret ballot.

They are apparently so successfully indoctrinated by decades of leftist public education and media that even in the privacy of the polling booth they are sweating about what they've been told is being a racist i.e. not lying down and letting Muslims take over. They cannot live with their "racist" selves or they're afraid that if too many of their countrymen vote anti-immigration, then "world opinion" will think poorly of them. Whatever their reasoning, they have refused to support cease-immigration parties who are truly heroic Davids since their very existence requires moving mountains unlike the plethora of leftist parties whose wheels are greased with tax monies. Anti-immigration politicians are harassed in every way possible and they lack the protection a large voting bloc could give them. They are picked off one by one and surely demoralized by their lack of support.

There's the truly noble Gert Wilders, a lone cowboy facing down the bad guys while the townspeople not only cower in their beds but take potshots at HIM rather than come to his aid.

There can hardly be a civil war when people can't be bothered to even vote for the rebel side when they still have the opportunity. Someone who flubs it in the the privacy of the polling booth is not going to be marching in an armed revolt. And of course most Europeans have been disarmed as a preliminary step to totalitarian rule.

At least in the United States the vote is split close to down the middle (not on immigration as multicult has done its damage) but at least on the terrorist (Muslim) threat.

It looks as though Europe as we know it will end not with a bang but a whimper.

The United States has a significant number of citizens who have arms and will fight. However, by the time the Obama wrecking crew has accelerated socialism and "world rule", the American rebels will be a small rump floating in a sea of totalitarianism with leftists and Islamists fighting over the spoils of the western world.

It may be doomed, but there will be some resistance in the States. Europe's resistance will be even more effete than during WWII. Many embraced the Nazis to survive. They are embracing their Islamist masters now, even earlier than necessary. You know those French. So pragmatic, while pointing fingers at others. They'll concentrate on making their burkas modish.

I do not trust Berbers, I note only we have a perfect tool to dissolve islamic/Arabic loyalties paying few bugs:

In Kabylie they are next to the see-shore, in Morocco yes Rif mt. are isolated and poor. Berber nationalism could stress the need to do something at home, implying smooth return back to Morocco.

We want them to go home and get some job there - their national renaissance is a perfect job even for unemployed, it would be much cheaper than bribing them into going home or deporting them forcefully. You need a few smart leaders and Dutch mosques might be empty. You are extremely static.You may get them an Obama - arabo-berber to do the job. You do not understand nuances.

One day the Dutch Berbers can explain at home how the Dutch got rid of the Spanish. I guess they have already some TV like Kurds, Kopts, Assyrians, Persians broadcasting from the West.

Laine, without wanting to sound like a dick, can you remind me when you lot voted for a party dedicated to standing against islam?

We have them. Most EU member states have one, or two parties standing on a platform of restoring national control and reversing islamisation - amongst other things. They aren't in power yet but they are getting votes, which is why they're being persecuted.

Our problem is two-fold. The control of our borders by the EU means we can't prevent islamic immigration, and the presence of the EU means that there is no accountability of our rulers to the voting public. Removing the EU is one very powerful avenue of reversing the islamisation of Europe - and people are already moving in this direction. People are already choosing to do this. Wilders is in the Dutch parliament because people did vote for his party.

Hence, again, the persecution of these minority parties and the outrageous legal assaults on public figures who stand for a return of national control or a prevention of islamic immigration. Wilders's prosecution is a result of the fact that he is a visible expression of public rebellion against the anointed order.

It is still possible to resolve this without civil war and armed insurrection. Such a resolution is preferable.

I just have to ask: Have any of you served in any armed forces whatsoever? Do you think the western military intelligence will tolerate groups such as BNP to cause serious political violence? I see your faction of anti-islam seems to be more and more favouring the rhetoric of racewar and conflict escalation, witness Luton and Oslo recently. Do you think the military folks who feel the repercussions of Quran burning, etc. , isnt paying y`all attention? "Fjordman"?